قَوْمِهِۦ

12:77.

Commentary:

This verse forms the concluding portion of the passage (beginning with 6:77 above) containing Abraham’s argument with his people. It definitely settles the question whether Abraham gradually came to have faith in God by taking one heavenly body after another for his Lord or whether it was a skilfully graduated argument by means of which he sought to demonstrate the error of his people in worshipping these heavenly bodies as gods. Says God, That is our argument which We gave to Abraham against his people. Thus, the Quran refers to what has gone above as an "argument" which God Himself taught Abraham and which Abraham used with such great effect against his people. This declaration by the Quran leaves not the slightest doubt that Abraham was not wandering about after false gods, but was trying to convince his people of their error by means of a very effective process of reasoning. This is why it is referred to in the present verse in the light of a favour by the Wise and All-Knowing God.

This verse, though put in Ruku‘ 10, really forms part of the preceding passage. It must be remembered that the division of the Quran into 30 Paras (parts) and the division of the Surahs (chapters) into Ruku‘s (sections) was not made by the Holy Prophet nor by his Companions, but was effected long afterwards by Muslim scribes for providing facility in reading, and for the convenience of reference. In the time of the Holy Prophet there were only Surahs and verses and nothing else.

11:26-27; 23:24.

Important Words:

نوح (Noah) a very ancient Prophet who, as the Bible tells us, lived nine generations after Adam and eleven generations before Abraham. (Gen, 5:3-32; Luke 3:34-38). His native land was Mesopotamia. He is believed to be the progenitor of the greater part of mankind. The word نوح (Noah) may, in Arabic, be considered to have been derived from ناح which means, he bewailed or mourned. They say ناحت علی زوجھا i.e. the woman bewailed or mourned over her dead husband. ناحت الحمامة نوحا means, the pigeon cooed in a plaintive manner. The Prophet Noah is particularly known for the Flood that overtook his people as the result of his bewailings and lamentations before God for the persecution he had to suffer at the hands of his wicked people, most of whom perished in the Flood. His three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, are generally believed to be the ancestors of the three principal races of mankind. See also 11:26.

Commentary:

After having briefly described the great moral and spiritual reformation that the appearance of a Prophet brings about among a people, and the evil consequences to which opposition to him leads, the present verse proceeds to give illustrations of some of the nations of antiquity, beginning with the people of Noah, to show that those, who oppose God’s Prophets, meet with nothing but destruction. Most of the different races now living on this earth are believed to be descended from Noah. His descendants seem to have spread in all directions, as may be seen from the story of the Deluge which is known to the people of Europe, Asia, Africa and even America.

The words, We sent Noah to his people, show that the Deluge overtook only the people to whom Noah was sent. It was not a universal phenomenon, but the descendants of Noah may have carried the tale to distant lands.

The words یوم عظیم literally meaning "a great day", have been used to signify a day of heavy punishment which was too dreadful to be forgotten.

Important Words:

الملاء (chief men). See 2:247.

Commentary:

When the so-called leaders of his tribe found, to their mortification, that Salih stood firm as a rock in his convictions and no amount of persuasion could make him swerve from his purpose, they began to harass his followers, but these too they found bold and firm.

14:14.

Commentary:

Disbelievers, complacently conscious of their power and wealth, listen to no request however reasonable, and in the words of the opponents of Shu‘aib always say: "There is no need for anyone to judge between us. We ourselves can judge and our verdict is that, only he who follows our religion will be allowed to live with us." On the other hand, the followers of every Prophet, like the followers of Shu‘aib, have always made a pathetic, though unavailing, appeal to their persecutors in the words: "Will you compel us to adopt your religion, even if it offends our reason and goes against our conscience?" The concluding words of the verse also show that throughout history good and intelligent men have always believed that force should not be used in matters relating to conscience.

20:87.

20:95.

Important Words:

فلاتشمت (make not rejoice). تشمت is formed from اشمت which is derived from شمت. They say شمت or شمت به i.e. he (an enemy) rejoiced; or he (someone) rejoiced at his enemy’s affliction. اشمته الله به means, God made him (the enemy) rejoice at his affliction. شمت علی العاطس means, he prayed for the sneezer that he might not be in a state in which his enemy might rejoice at his affliction (Lane).

Commentary:

When the return of Moses was delayed owing to the ten additional nights, his followers became impatient and thought that he was lost. They expressed their impatience in the words "we wot not what is become of him" (Exod. 32:1).

According to the Bible, Moses cast the tablets out of his hands and broke them beneath the Mount, so that they had to be renewed (Exod. 32:19; 34:1). But this is not borne out by the Quran which simply states, And he put down the tablets and this is more in harmony with the dignity of a Prophet.

Moses caught hold of Aaron’s head, not because the latter had abetted calf-worship, as he is represented to have done in the Bible (Exod. 32:2-4), but because he did not successfully prevent the people from worshipping the calf. As Moses’ representative, he should have effectively prevented the people from idol-worship, but he failed to do so. So the display of anger on the part of Moses was due not to any religious or legal offence committed by Aaron, but to his failure to manage affairs properly in the absence of Moses. Aaron had hoped that Moses would set things right on his return. That was only an error of judgement or lack of proper control, not a legal or religious offence.

The way in which Moses treated Aaron also shows that the latter was subordinate to the former. The treatment, however, should not be taken as a display of rough manners on the part of Moses. The anger of Moses was justified because a great sacrilege had been committed and the very work of his life was jeopardized; and Aaron being subordinate to Moses, the latter was entitled to take disciplinary action.

The words, Son of my mother, were used by Aaron not because Moses was a half-brother to him but because he wished to make an effective appeal to his feelings of tenderness and affection, and in this he succeeded.

The meaning of the particle مع (with) in the clause, and place me not with the unjust people, helps to explain its real sense in 4:70. Here, as well as there the particle gives the meaning of "among".

28:5.

Commentary:

It appears from this verse that all the Israelites had not believed in Moses. Only a part of them had really believed in him. The rest followed him from only political or national considerations. The pronoun "his" in the clause, from among his people, may also refer to Pharaoh. In that case the clause would mean that some youths of the people of Pharaoh also believed in Moses. But the former interpretation seems to be more correct and is therefore preferable.

This verse also brings to light the fact that not unoften an appreciable number of the people to whom a Prophet of God preaches his Message become convinced of his truth, but they dare not profess their faith openly for fear of their leaders and chiefs. The pronoun "their" in the words "their chiefs" may refer either to the Israelites or to the people of Pharaoh. Preferably it refers to the people of Pharaoh. The chiefs of the people of Pharaoh have been called the chiefs of the Israelites because the latter were a subject people. But the pronoun need not necessarily be taken as referring to any particular people. The great men of a country are regarded as chiefs not merely because they belong to any particular community but also because, being members of the government, they possess influence and authority. Hence the high officials of the State, whether they belonged to the people of Pharaoh or the Israelites might rightly be called the chiefs of the Israelites and it was through both that Pharaoh tyrannized over the Israelites.

The words, Pharaoh was a tyrant in the land, show that Pharaoh was not a wise and sagacious monarch. He had embarked upon a policy of open repression and persecution which was calculated to incite the people to rebellion. This policy eventually led to the downfall of the dynasty.

23:25.

26:112.

Important Words:

بادی الرأی (to all outward appearance) is made up of two Arabic words بادی and الرأی. The word بادی has two possible derivations. It may be derived from بدأ (bad’a) which means, he or it began or he or it came into existence. بدأ به means, he began with it; he made it to be the first. Or the word بادی may be derived from بدأ (of which the aorist is یبدو) which means, it appeared or it showed itself. According to these two different roots the word بادی would mean: (1) that which or he who is first or that which or he who begins; (2) that which or he who appears. And the word الرأی means sight or perception or opinion. So the compound expression بادی الرأی would mean: (1) at first thought or on the first opinion; (2) at the appearance of opinion or according to the appearance of opinion, which may mean either inconsiderately or insincerely (Lane, under بدا & بدأ).

Commentary:

The Arabic expression بادی الرأی (to all outward appearance) is capable of three interpretations according to the rules of Arabic grammar. First, it may be taken as referring to the words ونراك (and we see). In this case, the verse would mean that the followers of Noah appear to us to be the meanest of us at first thought or on the first opinion, i.e. so far as our opinion is concerned we consider them to be mean. If, however, there is any hidden good in them, it may be known to Noah only.

Secondly, the expression بادی الرأی may be taken to refer to the words اراذلنا (the meanest of us). In this case the verse would mean that the followers of Noah were apparently low and mean.

Thirdly, the expression بادی الرأی may be taken as qualifying the words اتبعك (have followed thee). In this case the verse would mean that those who have accepted Noah have done so only outwardly or without proper thinking i.e. their faith was either insincere or inconsiderate, being based on mere cursory thinking.

To sum up, the words اراذلنا بادی الرأی mean: (1) the followers of Noah are mean to all outward appearance; or (2) their faith in Noah is insincere; or (3) their faith is the result of only superficial thinking.

The words, We see in thee nothing but a man like ourselves, mean, "There is nothing extraordinary in your outward appearance to distinguish you from us. You are just a human being like any other mortal. When therefore, there is nothing extraordinary in your outward appearance, how should we know that inwardly you have been endowed with exceptional powers which have helped you to gain access to Divine presence, while we cannot ?"

This is the common objection raised by the opponents of the Prophets. The enemies of Noah purported to say that if he possessed some special inward power from God, that ought to have caused some difference in his outward appearance and as a result of it he should have acquired knowledge of some worldly sciences also, but they saw no evidence of this. How could they then believe that his internal powers were different from, and superior to, theirs. In support of this argument the opponents of Noah might possibly have shown to him pictures of their holy men having extraordinary exteriors, such as the Hindu saints are believed to possess, for instance, a number of heads and several hands. In olden days, men could not conceive that a Prophet was like ordinary mortals in appearance. So the enemies of Noah, arguing that the outward must correspond with the inward and that there must be harmony between the two, raised against him the objection that if he was really a true Prophet, his outward appearance must have been different from theirs. Silly though the argument is, it must have won endorsement from the contemporaries of Noah.

The enemies of Noah further reinforce their argument by saying that while he himself possessed no special powers, and was a mortal like themselves, his followers were even worse than him. What success could he achieve, they asked, with adher-ents who, to all outward appearance, were the meanest of the society? The enemies of Noah thus argued that neither his own personal qualities nor those of his followers gave him the appearance of "superiority" over them.

The words, we believe you to be liars, embody the result of the arguments brought forward by Noah’s opponents, which is that he was a liar, for he had asserted his truth and superiority without any basis or proof.

It is a pity that men test the claims of a heavenly Messenger by their self-devised standards and, when he does not satisfy those standards, they deceive themselves with the idea that they had weighed up his claims dispassionately and with an open mind and had found them to be false. Even in the present age when man has made great progress in knowledge, science and culture and has known many Prophets, he presumes to test the claims of God’s Messengers’ not by criteria laid down by Him but by his own false standards.

Commentary:

Messengers of God are always mocked at because they bring teachings which the people of their time are not prepared to accept. But these people never pause to consider that if heavenly Messengers were not entrusted with extraordinary work, there would be no need for God to send Messengers. It is only because man, in spite of his intellectual attainments, cannot rid himself of his manifold troubles and because the cure which, with the help of his experience and knowledge, he devises brings him no relief that God sends His Messengers for his guidance and deliverance, and as the remedy which they suggest is out of the ordinary, it naturally appears strange to him and he begins to ridicule and mock at it. But despite this jeering and ridicule, Divine Messengers and their followers succeed in attaining their goal, while their opponents make fools of themselves and incur God’s displeasure.

For the meaning of the expression, we shall mock at you, see note on 2:16.

13:28; 74:32.

Commentary:

The verse does not mean that a Divine Messenger should receive his revelation only in the language of his people. What it means is that the major and fundamental part of his revelation must be in the tongue of his people, otherwise the conveying of his Message to those who are its first recipients would become difficult. Occasionally, however, a Prophet may receive a revelation in a foreign tongue. In fact, such exceptional revelation would serve as a divine sign or miracle.

It is wrong to infer from this verse, as the Rev. Mr. Wherry and other Christian writers have done, that the Message of the Holy Prophet was confined to the Arabs. Such an assumption is forcefully belied by other verses of the Quran in which the Prophet is clearly and unequivocally declared to be a Prophet sent for the whole world (7:159; 34:29). Not only does the Quran claim a universal mission for the Holy Prophet, but the Prophet himself also claimed to be a Messenger for all mankind. For instance, he is reported to have said, بعثت الی الاسود و الاحمر i.e. I have been sent to the black and the red, meaning the whole of mankind (Bihar). Similarly, he said, بعثت الی الناس عامة i.e. I have been raised for all mankind (Bukhari). According to yet another hadith he is reported to have said, ارسلت الی الخلق کافة i.e. I have been sent to the whole creation (Mishkat).

Incidentally, this verse proves that Arabic is the mother of all tongues, because the fact that the Holy Prophet was sent to the whole of mankind shows that the language which the Wise God made the vehicle of His Message, must, in one way or another, be the mother of all languages. This was actually proved to be the truth by Ahmad, the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (see "Minan-ur-Rahman").

The fact that the words, Then Allah lets go astray whom He wills, have been placed after the words, that he might make things clear to them, shows that it is only after the truth is brought home to men that they become deserving of punishment for rejecting it. Thus, although all non-Muslims are technically called disbelievers or Kafirs, yet all of them will not go to Hell; for, as the verse shows, only those disbelievers become deserving of punishment who reject the truth after it has been made clear to them. Mere technical disbelief does not render one liable to punishment.

3:42; 33:43.

Important Words:

اوحی (asked in a low voice) is derived from وحی. They say وحی الی فلان or اوحی i.e. he communicated to him or gave order or made a request by gesture or sign; he talked to him in secret or he talked to him in such a way that others may not hear him; اوحی اللّٰه الیه means, God sent revelation to him. The real sense of وحی (wahy) which is inf. noun from وحی (waha) is to convey one’s intention or wish by means of quick signs which may be done by gesture, writing, etc. They say اوحی العمل i.e. he did the thing quickly. اوحی الدواء الموت means, medicine precipitated his death (Lane & Aqrab). See also 5:112.

For محراب (chamber) see 3:38.

Commentary:

When Zachariah was commanded by God not to speak to his people for three consecutive nights, he made up his mind to devote himself fully and completely to the remembrance of God. During this time when he had to speak to anyone he spoke so low as to be heard only by those very near him. In 3:42 the word رمزا has been used to express the same sense, for رمز means to communicate by means of movements of the lips and not to use one’s throat. So the Quran repudiates the Biblical suggestion that Zachariah was struck dumb. What actually happened was that he told his people in very low tones that he had been commanded by God to remember and glorify Him and that they should also do the same and not disturb him.

7:151.

Commentary:

موعدی (my promise) means, the promise which you made to me, or the promise which God made to you through me.

7:60; 11:26; 71:2.

Commentary:

In the preceding few verses a brief account was given as to how God has provided for the physical needs of man. From this verse begins an account of the means which God has provided for the satisfaction of his spiritual needs. The coming of Divine Messengers is the first and foremost means provided for this purpose. The present and the next few verses refer to Noah, the first great Prophet who came with a Divinely-revealed Law. He called his people to God, to the path of success and salvation and like other Prophets emphasized the Unity of God which was the pivot round which all the religious beliefs and teachings revolved, and which formed the corner stone of the edifice of all religions.

It may be said in passing that humanity had to pass through four cycles to reach its perfect moral and spiritual development: (1) In the cycle of Adam the foundations were laid of human civilization. (2) Noah was the founder of the cycle of the Shari‘ah. (3) In the cycle of Moses the details of the Shari‘ah were revealed and (4) with the Holy Prophet was completed the fourth and last cycle when the Shari‘ah became complete and perfect and man attained the highest peak of social, moral and spiritual development.

7:61; 11:28; 17:95; 34:44.

17:96.

Commentary:

The disbelievers have always suffered from a superiority complex and therefore have always rejected Divine Messengers on the plea that they cannot accept the lead of one who is "only a man like ourselves."

The verse incidentally implies that belief in the existence of angels was entertained from time immemorial. As far back as Noah’s time his opponents wanted to see angels descending on them. See also 11:28.

Important Words:

سنة (year) is derived both from سنه and سنو. They say سنه الطعام i.e. the food rotted; or it rotted by the lapse of years. As derived from سنا یسنو this word (سنة) signifies "a simple revolution of the sun," i.e. a simple revolution of the earth round the sun. It is synonymous with عام (and also حول) with this difference that whereas every سنة is an عام every عام is not سنة. It is also said to be longer than the عام which is applied to the twelve Arabian months collectively; but سنة is also applied to twelve revolutions of the moon. According to Imam Raghib سنة is used as denoting a year in which there is difficulty, or drought or barrenness or dearth; and عام as denoting that in which is ampleness of the means or circumstances of life and abundance of herbage or the like. سنة also means, drought or barrenness or vehement or intense drought. أصابتھم السنة means, drought, etc. befell them. سنة سنھاءmeans, a year in which there is no herbage or rain. سنة سنواء means, a hard, rigorous or distressing year (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In the verse under comment the age of Noah has been mentioned as 950 years. The Bible gives 952 years as his age. But it is difficult to assign a definite date as to when the Prophets of antiquity, such as Noah, Hud, Salih, etc. lived and how long they lived. "None knows them save Allah," says the Quran (14:10). Nine hundred and fifty years does not seem to be the span of Noah’s life but the period of his Dispensation. In fact, the age of a Prophet is the age of his Dispensation and teaching. It is in this sense that we call the Holy Prophet Muhammad the ever-living Prophet and Islam the everlasting religion. It appears from the Quran (37:84) that Abraham was a follower of Noah. This means that Noah’s period continued up to the time of Abraham or even to that of Joseph or of Moses.

Noah’s Dispensation seems to have lasted about 950 years. In describing the limit of Noah’s age two words سنة and عام have been used. Whereas the root meaning of the former word possesses a sense of badness, that of latter has a sense of goodness. It seems that the first fifty years of Noah’s Dispensation were years of all-round spiritual progress and regeneration and after that moral decadence and degeneration set in and his people gradually became degraded morally, till their degeneration became complete in nine hundred years.